Honest question - Would you rather MBB if you don't land at a top bank?

If you want to be in PE you're honestly better off in IB. Would be interested in seeing the source for better placement into PE though, I never heard of that. For actual investing roles at least.

really sorry if im offending any bofa/citi/cs/barclays/greenhill/gugg/rbc/jefferies etc analysts lol

are you considering that the interviews are pretty different from one another? reason why most people don't recruit for both, other than different recruiting timelines, is that the interview process for consulting looks for market sizing, walking through cases etc whereas ib is valuation/accounting. Both take a lot of time to prep for

Also, if you strike out at all the EBs and the top BBs, there might be some other issue with you as a candidate in general. I dont know anyone who actually grinded for an EB position, got rejected by them all, then landed MBB as backup.

Nah I fucking hate flying

for everyone curious about the MBB placements.. read the 2 posts by user embeebee on WSO, who went from MBB to MF/UMM PE. im a new user so my comments posting the link are getting deleted

Totally depends on someone’s goals. If you want to go to buyout, a hedge fund, etc. it makes more sense to go IB. Doesn’t matter if that’s at Barclays, Citi, CS, Greenhill, Guggenheim, whatever. Being at an MBB won’t help with those goals

Dude when MS has more employees than MBB combined, it’s clear to see why “per person” MBB places better into anything. They’re not all bankers and consultants obviously, but my point is, there are way more bankers than consultants. “Better placement” is a skewed metric.

Go to a top firm, perform well in your job, perform well in PE interviews, hope for the best. Do what you like more - banking and consulting will both suck in terms of hours, but the nature of the work is vastly different. I personally wouldn’t do MBB instead because, in my skewed perception, I don’t like consulting.

If your only goal was to go to bschool, it would be different - MBB will be more “diverse” than every banker because there are way more bankers than consultants. But whichever one you’ll be better at will lead to a “better placement” for PE. In terms of name, you have once-off people who place into MFPE or UMMPE from “lesser firms” but that’s likely because they’ll do well in any job they’re in. Also, PE involves modeling - keep that in mind, that banking has more transferable skills.

TLDR; do whatever you like more.

Thoughts on MM IB like JEF/WB/Baird vs MBB if goal is PE after two years?

I don't think this strategy makes a lot of sense. Getting a job at MBB is quite difficult. It's probably going to be harder to get an offer from MBB than GS/MS/JPM/EB collectively.

Because interviewing takes a lot of preparation, I suggest you don't try to hedge your bets. You can apply to MBB anyway if you want, but focus on banking recruiting.

Also, the consulting industry is so broad, not all roles transition to PE well. At MBB, you could be doing digital transformation, restructuring, DD, operations implementation, org. designs, etc.

MBB places better at startups because HR has always wanted to be consultants.

Mate, first, I call BS on the MBB probably places better than banking. The pool of people at MBB with a shot at PE are (i) people in the "PE practice" and (ii) people with previous (relevant!) M&A experience. So, per capita that's a very slim slice of MBB headcount.

Second, if you just want to be in PE don't overcomplicate it. Go to IB. Earn your stripes. That's what 95% of people in PE do.

Agree with everyone else saying MBB is not the best path to PE. I was very on the fence between IB/consulting so did a lot of networking and ended up going IB. Obviously people make the jump, but it's very difficult and not as structured of a process, headhunters don't reach out, etc. Just because people are able to make the jump from MBB to PE does not mean its an easy path.

I'm at a non-super top bank (think Jefferies type), and I still think my changes at PE are a lot better than at MBB. People from my bank go to PE all the time, there are bank alumni at all sorts of PE firms, and even if I don't get MF my chances at UMM/MM are pretty good. I know plenty of people at MBB who weren't able to make the jump to PE of any kind just because it's not a well trodden path.

Also, people on here are crazy if they think it's easier to get MBB compared to GS/MS/etc. MBB is arguably even more selective with only recruiting at target schools, and their acceptance rates are extremely low. Sure, good candidates don't get jobs at GS because there's an element of randomness, but I would be absolutely shocked if someone who wasn't able to land a job at any BB/EB was somehow able to land an MBB job. At my ivy, I would say the best candidates probably go buyside or top IB (top EBs and GS/MS/JPM), the next best kids go to MBB (though many of these kids could easily land top IB jobs if they wanted), and the next tier down go to next tier IB jobs like top MM, WF/RBC, etc. Most of these kids would not be able to land an MBB job even if they wanted.

I think you're cutting it too tight in terms of prestige sensitivity.

In other words I could understand if you said, for example, that you need to at least be at a BB/EB or "best of the rest" (think Jefferies, Greenhill) or you'd consider MBB instead.

But to say you'd rather be at Lazard than MBB, but then that you'd rather be at MBB than Greenhill, I think is just too much. I get how MBB and IB have their similarities, both place into PE, etc.

But its still a different career. Whatever reasons you had to prefer IB generally, should apply to a broader list of firms.

Happy to offer my two cents (will also do an AMA this week, so can answer specifics there).

I would say that your odds of landing a job at a more prestigious PE shop are higher from MBB than most investment banks, but there are some caveats: - If you're interested in working at a certain MF that's mostly modeling driven (Apollo, Blackstone), it's extremely hard (read: almost impossible) to break in from MBB. I personally know a few people who landed a job at KKR, Warburg, etc. from MBB but there are very few. - If you're interested in a job at a more operationally-focused but prestigious fund (H&F, Berkshire Partners, Bain Cap), your odds are very similar from MBB as they are from a top IB (GS, PJT, etc.). People can break into these funds from a less prestigious investment bank, but it's quite difficult. Look up the associate class on the Berkshire Partners, New Mountain, H&F, Sycamore website, etc. - it's almost exclusively MBB or bankers from top firms / groups. - If you're interested in working for a less prestigious PE firm that is only hires bankers (there are dozens and dozens of these) , then obviously you can't access these funds from MBB.

Anecdotally, I would estimate that ~75% of the people I know from MBB that recruit for PE ended up getting a job at a well respected PE firm (all MM/UMM/MF). However, there is a huge selection bias as the people who do recruit for PE from MBB usually have a good understanding of finance , have done a rotation in the PE group, etc.

Also, I agree with some posts above in how you classified investment banks. There's no hard rule with rankings. The best thing to do is go on each firm's website or LinkedIn and see which firms and groups they hire from.

All in all, if your goal is to be in PE regardless of the size of the firm (i.e. you'd be fine going to a shop with a $1B fund), then go into investment banking. If you only want to go to a Apollo type shop, go into IB. If you want to maximize your odds at one of the ~15 prestigious shops that are more operationally focused and hire consultants, then I would choose MBB over a second-tier investment bank.